Isn't "just contributing to a Scheme system" or "writing a library for snow-fort/akku.scm" essentially the "lightweight design process"? Especially if you want to permit mistakes/erroneous decisions? Isn't that basically "I develop things as a library, people try it, test it, decide that it is not worth, and port their programs away from relying on it"? If you want a proper discussion step for the proposals, the one that wouldn't just amount to something like the github code-review feature, that would be nice to have, but it seems hard to achieve, because even srfis, that are far more polished pieces of text, prepared to be read by humans, are not always getting all the attention they need. Sorry for being critical, but I think that the problem here is not really the lack of a due process, but a lack of workforce. I may be wrong, obviously. On 25/04/2021 17:33, Lassi Kortela wrote: > As SRFI deadlines approach and the pre-SRFI queue grows, I am once again > asking for your moral support in considering a more lightweight process. > > Scheme now has two standards processes: > > - RnRS (very slow, very careful, got to get things right at once) > > - SRFI (somewhat slow, careful, prefer to get things right at once) > > We are missing a third process: > > - very fast, not that careful, prefer to ship quickly and clean up later > > I argue that a lot of the time we use SRFI and occasionally even RnRS to > design solutions to problems that we don't truly understand. It would be > better to solve these problems using a process that is tolerant > mistakes. This would better account for intrinsic human limits in > predicting the future and reasoning about unknown circumstances, and > alleviate the perfectionism and analysis paralysis that many of us > succumb to from time to time. > > I previously suggested establishing Scheme Live (fledgling GH > organization at https://github.com/scheme-live/live) which got off to a > good start but only Amirouche and I have committed code so far. > > What spurred me to write this email is that I just realized we could > basically dump the preliminary code from https://github.com/pre-srfi > into one monorepo and it would be a perfectly good start for a > lightweight design process. We could add in the R7RS-large SRFIs and the > code from https://github.com/scheme-live/live too, resolving any > duplicate functionality so there's one library for any given job. > > We https://github.com/pre-srfi we basically have all the technical > trappings of a lightweight process already. We're just doing it Big > Design Up Front style out of habit. > > In all discussions of this kind, it bears repeating that this is first > and foremost a social issue: a group of people have to decide to work > together and resolve problems by talking instead of forking code. The > good news is that that's the way we already resolve problems in SRFI. > > Would the people around SRFI be interested in formalizing the > lightweight work we already more or less have?
